I just managed to catch up with the October edition… gunzines are hard to come by on the newsstands here, so this took a determined effort.

Rich, among other things, stated that the reason for this particular Forum was:

• To solicit comments and suggestions for S.W.A.T.

So, in that spirit, I have a serious question about your maiden voyage under the new command: content (there's an Internet buzz word for ya!) needs to be accurate and informative, but doesn't it also need to be responsible?

Although I'm pretty much retired from the gunzine game at this point, I know many of those still in it, and have discussed some of these issues with them over the years. Ultimately, I think the "buck" has to stop with the Editor, and in this case, that's you.

Item: writers love to pose with their guns 'n' gear in the most flattering light, but when those poses set a bad example for readers, wouldn't it be incumbent upon the Editor to reject a photo and demand that it be re-shot properly? I know my ol' chum Dep'ty Ed Sanow loves a particular steely-eyed profile of himself (almost as much as one of your predecessors adores a certain 20-year-old series of photos of himself in military cover and wolly-bully sweater when he's demonstrating his prowess with a 1911A1), but where's Ed's eye and ear protection most of the time? Leroy Thompson certainly has it in his range session with the MAT-49 (page 19), as do the team members on page 23, and so does Br'er Sanow on pages 27 and 28… but not Flint Hansen on page 77.

Item: I think the most egregious photo in the October issue is the one accompanying Ed's article on the top left of page 29… can't tell who the model is, but isn't that finger-on-the-trigger-while-activating-the-charge-handle an automatic ND? I don't think I'm mis-reading the position of the fire selector switch, so that's just horrendous all the way around.

People, especially those you are attempting to attract to your re-vitalized publication, will emulate what they see, and when they see things like this, it's bad juju.

Otherwise, an auspicious start… O, sure, you've got a couple of tired ol' hacks on staff, but any list of contributors which includes Louis Awerbuck, Patty Rogers and Clint Smith has that critical element missing from most of the gunzines: credibility. (You might want to figure out a new format for Rogers' articles if they're gonna be so laden with acronyms, however… perhaps a sidebar "key" which would help the information flow of the feature without all the parenthetical comments. )